What a Follow Up Appointment Is Actually For
The first prescription is a considered hypothesis. The follow up is where it gets tested.
Dr. Aarti Gadhavi, BHMS
Classical Homoeopath, Magarpatta, Pune
Medically reviewed by Dr. Aarti Gadhavi, BHMS, on 30 July 2026
A follow up exists to test whether the first prescription was right, which means it is at least as important as the initial consultation. What is assessed is not only the presenting complaint but how the person is overall: energy, sleep, mood and general wellbeing, since those often shift before the main complaint does. It is also where an honest practitioner says plainly that nothing has changed.
People treat the first appointment as the important one and the review as an administrative formality. It is the other way round.
A first prescription is a reasoned hypothesis about a person, and a hypothesis that is never tested is not medicine.
What is actually being assessed
Not simply whether the complaint has gone. The questions cover a wider field, because in classical practice the direction of change matters as much as the amount.
- The main complaint, in the same detail as before. Frequency, severity, duration, character.
- General energy, which frequently moves earliest.
- Sleep, both quantity and quality.
- Mood and how you have coped since the last visit.
- Appetite and digestion.
- Anything new, including things that seem unrelated.
- Anything that got worse, which matters and is often not volunteered.
A person whose complaint is unchanged but who is sleeping better and has more energy is a different situation from a person in whom nothing whatsoever has moved. Both are useful information and they point in different directions.
Why a written record helps so much
Memory is reconstructive and it is particularly unreliable about symptoms. People forget good weeks entirely during a bad one, and they misremember when something started by weeks or months.
A few lines a week is enough. The date, how the complaint was, how you slept, anything unusual.
It costs almost nothing and it turns a vague impression into something that can actually be assessed. It also protects you from a practitioner who tells you that you are much better when you are not, and from your own tendency to conclude nothing has changed when something quietly has.
What counts as progress
| Instead of | Look for |
|---|---|
| Feeling generally better | Fewer episodes per month than before |
| It seems less severe | Shorter episodes, or less medication needed |
| I think it is helping | Better sleep, more energy, fewer disturbed nights |
| My skin looks alright | Less area affected, less itch, longer gaps |
| My stomach is easier | Wider range of food tolerated |
| I am coping better | Less time off work, fewer plans cancelled |
Agreeing these at the first appointment makes the review far more useful, because you are both measuring the same thing rather than comparing impressions.
Not as a formality, but because a first prescription is a hypothesis and hypotheses need testing.
When nothing has changed
This happens and it needs handling honestly. There are a few reasonable possibilities: the remedy selection was wrong, the case needs retaking with something that was missed, something maintaining the problem has not been addressed, or this approach is not going to help this person.
All four are legitimate. What is not legitimate is an indefinite sequence of appointments with no change and no acknowledgement, or an explanation that always requires more time and more money.
The reasonable expectation is that after a fair trial, which depends on the condition and should be agreed at the outset, a practitioner tells you plainly whether anything has moved and what they propose. If the answer is that this is not working, that should be said.
Questions worth asking at your review
- What specifically are you looking for as evidence this is working?
- What has changed in your view since last time?
- If nothing has changed, what are you proposing and why?
- How long before we conclude this approach is not helping me?
- Is there anything you think I should have investigated conventionally?
- Is there anything in my case that concerns you?
A practitioner who welcomes those questions is one worth staying with. The first visit page covers what happens initially, and potency and dilution covers how to judge treatment with your eyes open.
Common questions
Why is the follow up appointment important?
Because a first prescription is a reasoned hypothesis about a person, and the review is where it gets tested. What is assessed is not only the complaint but energy, sleep, mood and general wellbeing, since those often shift before the main complaint does and they point the practitioner in a direction.
What should I record between appointments?
A few lines a week is enough: the date, how the complaint was, how you slept, anything unusual. Memory is reconstructive and particularly unreliable about symptoms, so people forget good weeks during a bad one and misremember when things started by months.
What if my symptoms get worse after starting a remedy?
Report it rather than assuming it is a good sign and waiting. You may read about symptoms briefly intensifying, and whether that happens as described is debated. Some worsening is simply the condition progressing and needs looking at properly.
How long before I know if homoeopathy is working for me?
That depends on the condition and should be agreed at the outset rather than left open ended. The reasonable expectation is that after a fair trial your practitioner tells you plainly whether anything has moved and what they propose, including saying that it is not working if that is the answer.
What if nothing has changed at all?
There are a few legitimate possibilities: the selection was wrong, the case needs retaking, something maintaining the problem has not been addressed, or this approach will not help you. What is not legitimate is an indefinite sequence of appointments with no change and an explanation that always requires more time and money.
Written for the clinic of Dr. Aarti Gadhavi, BHMS, a classical homoeopath practising in Magarpatta, Hadapsar, Pune. It carries no remedy names, no cure claims and no invented statistics, because none of those belong on a doctor's website. If something here does not match what your own doctor has told you, your own doctor knows your case and this page does not.
